or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Psystar seek protective order in preparation for trial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Psystar seek protective order in preparation for trial

post #1 of 45
Thread Starter 
Apple and unauthorized Mac clone maker Psystar have agreed to restrict access to certain trade secrets and software code in an effort to avoid any leaks to their respective competitors as they near the discovery process that will precede a formal trial.

Filed yesterday, the 18-page order will bound both parties to an agreement requiring all "personal, proprietary, or confidential information or trade secrets" be labeled with "CONFIDENTIAL" and/or "CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY". The order is pending approved by Northern District of California Judge William Alsup.

The material in question could be documents, software code, interrogatories, deposition testimony, and other information found during discovery, and it is "not intended to govern" the trial. Presumably, Judge Alsup will establish guidelines of protection during that phase of the litigation.

The protected materials can only be used for prosecuting or defending the legal action, potential appeals included.

"If any party or third party believes that disclosure of Discovery Materials would affect its competitive position, security interests, intellectual properties, or technological developments in an adverse manner," the order states, "that party or third party may designate the Discovery Materials as 'CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.'"

The order continues, "The designation...shall be limited to Discovery Materials that the disclosing part in good faith believes contain extremely sensitive confidential information, the disclosure of which would create a substantial risk of serious competitive injury."

Either side will have an opportunity to review the résumés of their adversary's expert witnesses before they view the material and object at their discretion to any individual's participation. Once approved, those experts will be barred from consulting with a competitor (giving advice, analysis, or recommendations) for a full year after the trial – or appeal – has concluded. Each will sign an agreement attesting to those conditions before they participate.

Special provisions are in place for the discovery of software code produced by Psystar or Apple. Each side must make a secured computer "without access of any kind to the Internet or...network" available in a secure room at the law office of their attorneys. Every person who enters and leaves the room must sign and date a log, and no written or electronic record can be made of the software code, with one exception.

"The producing party shall make available a laser printer with commercially reasonable printing speeds for on-site printing during inspection of the Software Code," the order says. Printing is allowed only when "reasonably necessary" for case preparation, and only the portions needed can be printed. Those documents must be returned to the producing party at the end of all legal proceedings.

Apple, of course, has much more to lose if its software code is made public, as it would clear several hurdles for individuals who want to run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, putting the obvious competitive disadvantages with other companies aside. Psystar, meanwhile, may have to disclose the code it uses to circumvent the protection Apple uses to institute kernel panics and infinite loops on non-authorized hardware.

Psystar recently amended its complaint in mid-February, repeating its allegations that Apple is misusing its copyright to prevent third-parties from entering the Mac hardware business. Apple first sued last July to halt the cloner from selling its Open Computers with a hacked version of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard installed. Apple's End User Licensing Agreement forbids the use of its software on non-Apple hardware.

The trial is scheduled for November 9th.
post #2 of 45
[conspiracy theory]

What if it was Psystar's purpose all along just to get this information so they can leak it? If they reveal this stuff they go to jail for a few months and pay a big fine that they can't afford and won't end up paying anyway. Apple has a much bigger downside though and a leak like that can't be taken back.

[/conspiracy theory]

Also, what's with the super high security, but then they are allowed to print it out, stuff it in the lawyers briefcase and walk out the door with it?
WTF?
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #3 of 45
Pystar, lawyers and whoever is funding them have zero class.
post #4 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgil-tb2 View Post

[conspiracy theory]

what if it was psystar's purpose all along just to get this information so they can leak it? If they reveal this stuff they go to jail for a few months and pay a big fine that they can't afford and won't end up paying anyway. Apple has a much bigger downside though and a leak like that can't be taken back.

[/conspiracy theory]

also, what's with the super high security, but then they are allowed to print it out, stuff it in the lawyers briefcase and walk out the door with it?
Wtf?

OMG_ you're the first post- full of blah, blah, blah.
Always paranoid and negative. Always a stomach full of koolaid.
post #5 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

OMG_ you're the first post- full of blah, blah, blah.
Always negative. Always a stomach full of koolaid.

Can you imagine what Apple's code would be worth to certain other parties?

Your post is funny - you always make up scenarios where Apple is the bad guy - can't stand it when other posts disagree with that? You're the negative one.
post #6 of 45
Is it me or do Pystar not get the idea that Apple is a hardware company, but the software is there as an "extra" to run the hardware at its best.Or have I got the wrong idea?

I just don't get why they are t rying to ruin a good thing it makes me sad!!
Switched permenantly! 12/08/2006
Unibody MacBook Pro ▪ 2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo ▪ 4Gb Ram ▪ 500Gb 7200rpm HD ▪ Geforce 9600M GT ▪ Wireless Mighty Mouse ▪ Silver iPod Classic 160GB ▪ Black iPhone 3GS...
Reply
Switched permenantly! 12/08/2006
Unibody MacBook Pro ▪ 2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo ▪ 4Gb Ram ▪ 500Gb 7200rpm HD ▪ Geforce 9600M GT ▪ Wireless Mighty Mouse ▪ Silver iPod Classic 160GB ▪ Black iPhone 3GS...
Reply
post #7 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Well, Pollyanna, can you imagine what Apple's code would be worth to certain other parties? You always make up scenarios where Apple is the bad guy - can't stand it when other posts disagree with that? You're the negative one.

He's just getting back at me for once saying that teckstud was the first post and that he was usually negative about everything etc.

I was joking a bit with the paranoid stuff, but I'm sure that bad things *can* happen otherwise why have the protections in place at all? Lawyers can usually be counted on to be professional I guess, but everything about the personality of the Psystar defendants argues for them not giving a rat's behind about Apple's IP.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #8 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Can you imagine what Apple's code would be worth to certain other parties?

Your post is funny - you always make up scenarios where Apple is the bad guy - can't stand it when other posts disagree with that? You're the negative one.

You expect anything less from a handle ala, teckstud? Stud? Seriously?
post #9 of 45
I can't see how Psystar has made it this far. Apple has done all the copyrighting they could have done to protect OS X. If Apple does not want people to run their software on other hardware, they have the right to do so.
post #10 of 45
Quote:
Psystar, meanwhile, may have to disclose the code it uses to circumvent the protection Apple uses to institute kernel panics and infinite loops on non-authorized hardware.

This is getting annoying, whoever wrote this either doesn't understand how the system works, or is lying on purpose. If that is Psystars argument, they are full of shit.

That kernel panic happens because XNU expects the firmware to pass a device tree among other things to the kernel during boot, because XNU doesn't probe hardware like other kernels. BIOS can't do this, so the kernel can't continue and issues a panic, causing a reboot, which will happen over and over unless you use a small piece of code to pass a basic device tree to XNU. That is not a protection method. The protection method involves encrypted binaries and a key sitting in a chip in the hardware.

To imply that Apple is intentionally causing kernel panics on unauthorized hardware is completely crap, they don't need to do that.
post #11 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsteveman1 View Post

his is getting annoying, whoever wrote this either doesn't understand how the system works, or is lying on purpose. If that is Psystars argument, they are full of shit.

That kernel panic happens because XNU expects the firmware to pass a device tree among other things to the kernel during boot, because XNU doesn't probe hardware like other kernels. BIOS can't do this, so the kernel can't continue and issues a panic, causing a reboot, which will happen over and over unless you use a small piece of code to pass a basic device tree to XNU. That is not a protection method. The protection method involves encrypted binaries and a key sitting in a chip in the hardware.

To imply that Apple is intentionally causing kernel panics on unauthorized hardware is completely crap, they don't need to do that.

It's interesting how Psystar's version of what Apple is doing here has become the "standard explanation" even by those that don't agree with their suit.

Thanks for posting this. In all the threads I have read on the main Apple forums since this fiasco started, I don't think anyone has ever bothered to mention that Psystar's assertion about the "forced" kernel panic is simply wrong.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #12 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by UTisNUM1 View Post

I can't see how Psystar has made it this far. Apple has done all the copyrighting they could have done to protect OS X. If Apple does not want people to run their software on other hardware, they have the right to do so.

While I agree in sentiment....I think there are two points involved with

1) It is illegal to alter copyrighted software. If Psystar has done this, it is in the wrong.
2) If MAC OS X can be loaded and run with no modification of software, then the EULA comes into play. Can Psystar be a reseller of Mac OS X without a formal agreement with Apple allowing them to do so? The EULA (END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT) says that it can't be loaded on Non-apple hardware. I'm not sure the EULA actually pertains to Psystar since they were NEVER the end user. They created a system purely as a product for others to buy. The EULA is for the END USER.

If Apple by any chance loses this case, they will have to stop selling retail boxes of Mac OS X.
Other means will need to be made to distribute UPDATES.
post #13 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Can you imagine what Apple's code would be worth to certain other parties?

What would it be worth to certain other parties, well, for one thing, M$ Windows 7 will be released ON TIME!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #14 of 45
I wonder if this will cause SL to be delayed. If Apple needs to make plans on how to distribute it's future OS via retail would they hold of on the release or just switch their retail if they were to lose this case?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

If Apple by any chance loses this case, they will have to stop selling retail boxes of Mac OS X.
Other means will need to be made to distribute UPDATES.

Or increase the price to a point that it makes Psystar's clone "value" diminish completely. Either way, the consumer does not benefit from Psystar winning this case.

A more complex solution for Apple is to offer both two retail versions. One priced at $129 that requires a version of Mac OS X to be pre-installed (like with Windows) and an upgrade version priced, say, at $399 that can be done without the previous OS installed. The former is a PITA in that one must keep and use their old system disc. This may not be a big deal to most on this site but it does add a little complexity and a lot of time when starting from scratch.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #15 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Your post is funny - you always make up scenarios where Apple is the bad guy - can't stand it when other posts disagree with that? You're the negative one.

No- just VIRGIL-TB2 -that moron. He's a stalker- he posted similar things against me yesterday when what I wrote was far from negative.
And just curious - what "scenarios" are you talking about that I "made up"?
post #16 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

If Apple by any chance loses this case, they will have to stop selling retail boxes of Mac OS X.
Other means will need to be made to distribute UPDATES.

Good point, and very interesting.

It would make sense to pull all the retail boxes off the shelf and make this operating system available only with the hardware. All updates will be through the updater. When new version of the operating system becomes available, users have to purchase online from Apple as an upgrade. Since the operating system is intrinsically part of the hardware, the operating system cannot be available without proof of hardware ownership. I think such arrangement is similar to Wii, xBox, and PS2 and 3 which their operating system is intrinsically part of the hardware. The operating system cannot be purchased separately. This may be a direction that Apple may have been considering. Who knows.

Interesting.
post #17 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

1) It is illegal to alter copyrighted software. If Psystar has done this, it is in the wrong.

It is illegal to modify and distribute copyrighted software (that is what Psystar is doing, though there is some wiggleroom on technical differences here). That is copyright law. The EULA is a contract you agree to when you install OS X, in which you agree not to modify the closed source portions of the operating system, if you do that as far as i remember, your rights under the EULA evaporate including your right to use the software.

Quote:
2) If MAC OS X can be loaded and run with no modification of software, then the EULA comes into play. Can Psystar be a reseller of Mac OS X without a formal agreement with Apple allowing them to do so? The EULA (END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT) says that it can't be loaded on Non-apple hardware. I'm not sure the EULA actually pertains to Psystar since they were NEVER the end user. They created a system purely as a product for others to buy. The EULA is for the END USER.

It can't, and they can't. They have the right to purchase and resell boxed copies all they want, but in the absence of specific permission or a license to use the software in any way, they have no rights other than to simply resell what they already purchased. The EULA is the binding contract of use here, and until a court rules otherwise Psystar has no rights outside that contract, and it explicitly prohibits Psystar from doing what they are doing.

Quote:
If Apple by any chance loses this case, they will have to stop selling retail boxes of Mac OS X. Other means will need to be made to distribute UPDATES.

They could simply put some language on the package that says "this is a reduced cost upgrade license to OS X Snow Leopard". Full licenses come with the machine, or you can write to apple and ask to buy one (which they won't do).

However as others noted, they could (and should) make upgrades available inside the OS, perhaps the last point update to Leopard will include this ability. They still need to distribute physical discs for reinstallation, and they could offer an exchange program. Bring in your newly updated Mac with the restore disc and get a Snow Leopard version to replace the original disc.

post #18 of 45
If code has to be submitted by both parties, I would love to see what Psystar did to circumvent Apple's security. I believe they used (ripped-off) code from the Hackintosh community to accomplish this.

Looks like Psystar's greed is going to come back to bite them and quite possibly get the Hackintosh community shut down. Leave it to one one person (entity) to ruin it for everyone else.

I really hope the owners of Psystar get their testicles laid out on the chopping block. I don't understand why the courts did not issue some kind of injunction on Psystar to bar them from selling the clones until the case is finished. Worst case, Apple would have to pay damages to them - not like that would ever happen anyways.

The court system takes way too long to deal with such nonsense.
post #19 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

No- just VIRGIL-TB2 -that moron. He's a stalker- he posted similar things against me yesterday when what I wrote was far from negative.
And just curious - what "scenarios" are you talking about that I "made up"?

now that IS paranoid
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
post #20 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

No- just VIRGIL-TB2 -that moron. He's a stalker- he posted similar things against me yesterday when what I wrote was far from negative.
And just curious - what "scenarios" are you talking about that I "made up"?

Keep this up and I'll be obliged to report you lady.

To any mods: This will be my last post to this person, but if there was a way to filter out the posts I'd be obliged if you could send me PM about it. It's so hard not to respond.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #21 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

Keep this up and I'll be obliged to report you lady.

To any mods: This will be my last post to this person, but if there was a way to filter out the posts I'd be obliged if you could send me PM about it. It's so hard not to respond.

can't you put him on the "ignore list" ?? I've found it useful, but then s/he gets quoted anyway. perhaps thats "his" goal in life?
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
post #22 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


The court system takes way too long to deal with such nonsense.


the alternative is kangaroo courts & mob rule. Better justice be a bit slow & right...than swift & wrong.
post #23 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe View Post

can't you put him on the "ignore list" ?? I've found it useful, but then s/he gets quoted anyway. perhaps thats "his" goal in life?

Groovy, thanks and done.

I looked for it in the control panel and didn't find it which is why I posted. Found it now.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #24 of 45
I find it hard to believe that a small clone maker has the money for a complete trial with discovery, multiple rulings, etc, etc. This has got to cost 100s of thousands of dollars at least. I wonder where the money is coming from for Psystar to pursue this issue.
post #25 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by colibri View Post

I find it hard to believe that a small clone maker has the money for a complete trial with discovery, multiple rulings, etc, etc. This has got to cost 100s of thousands of dollars at least. I wonder where the money is coming from for Psystar to pursue this issue.

slice away the confusion with Occam's Razor.

"entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" - to me, there is one clear entity which stands to gain the most from any hardship Apple may experience through this case-> the desperate bunch of wretched bastards known collectively as M$ - with their ancient pre-dot.bomb business model...that...is...slowly...dragging them down into the mire.
post #26 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

[conspiracy theory]

What if it was Psystar's purpose all along just to get this information so they can leak it? If they reveal this stuff they go to jail for a few months and pay a big fine that they can't afford and won't end up paying anyway. Apple has a much bigger downside though and a leak like that can't be taken back.

[/conspiracy theory]

I can't honestly see how this trial would require Apple to show a whole bunch of proprietary source code.

At most, a few snippets here and there to prove the infringements on IP that Psystar has made. Considering the size of Apple's entire codebase and the breadth of their product lines (which is everchanging), it's not likely to cause any harm even if it did leak.

Apple likely gives away more code each day through their use of open source software than they'll be showing for the entire trial.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #27 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio View Post

I can't honestly see how this trial would require Apple to show a whole bunch of proprietary source code.

At most, a few snippets here and there to prove the infringements on IP that Psystar has made. Considering the size of Apple's entire codebase and the breadth of their product lines (which is everchanging), it's not likely to cause any harm even if it did leak.

Apple likely gives away more code each day through their use of open source software than they'll be showing for the entire trial.

You are probably right. I made a bit of a joke out of it to cover my ass, but it was just my first thought that the guys behind Psystar are so obviously untrustworthy and they are the last people you'd want to share any secrets with.

I had a vision of the Psystar guys in a room with the lawyer and the computer and they pull a USB key out of their pocket ...

A large part of the case as I understand it hinges on the Psystar claim that the kernel panic is introduced when any non-Apple computer is detected so Apple will have to show the real code and what XNU expects to see from the EFI as it's booting and so forth. I would imagine this info is already known, but I'm not really sure if it is or not.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #28 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by colibri View Post

I find it hard to believe that a small clone maker has the money for a complete trial with discovery, multiple rulings, etc, etc. This has got to cost 100s of thousands of dollars at least. I wonder where the money is coming from for Psystar to pursue this issue.

Perhaps Apple is funding Psystar. With the switch to Intel Apple knew that hacking OS X to run on non-Mac PCs was inevitable. Perhaps they also correctly guessed that a company would try to sell clones. Before the situation got out of hand requiring Apple to drastically alter their sales strategy of OS X they decided to secretly back Psystar. With Psystar being the only Mac clone company in the US and there technique for creating Mac clones is clearly illegal they can't win, but setting them up to publically lose hard will not only send a clear message to others, but establish a legal precedence.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #29 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_23 View Post

slice away the confusion with Occam's Razor.

"entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" - to me, there is one clear entity which stands to gain the most from any hardship Apple may experience through this case-> the desperate bunch of wretched bastards known collectively as M$ - with their ancient pre-dot.bomb business model...that...is...slowly...dragging them down into the mire.

If Psystar wins, then any reseller could install Mac OS X on macines they sell.
I don't think Microsoft wants Dell and HP (for examples) to offer Mac OS X machines
alongside Windows machines. They would suffer greatly with comparison.
post #30 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Perhaps Apple is funding Psystar. With the switch to Intel Apple knew that hacking OS X to run on non-Mac PCs was inevitable. Perhaps they also correctly guessed that a company would try to sell clones. Before the situation got out of hand requiring Apple to drastically alter their sales strategy of OS X they decided to secretly back Psystar. With Psystar being the only Mac clone company in the US and there technique for creating Mac clones is clearly illegal they can't win, but setting them up to publically lose hard will not only send a clear message to others, but establish a legal precedence.

That is ouragan wacky. Remember that Apple added some John Does to the lawsuit in
order to try to determine who is funding Psystar. It would sure look silly for the case
to go to court, and for Apple to determine that Apple is a John Doe Psystar backer.
Maybe your theory could work if Psystar(read Apple) offers at the last minute to
capitulate completely out of court.

Still, I don't believe Apple would want to appear to be bullying (as some people feel)
a small company, to possibly achieve intimidation through such fakery.
post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

That is ouragan wacky. Remember that Apple added some John Does to the lawsuit in
order to try to determine who is funding Psystar. It would sure look silly for the case
to go to court, and for Apple to determine that Apple is a John Doe Psystar backer.
Maybe your theory could work if Psystar(read Apple) offers at the last minute to
capitulate completely out of court.

Still, I don't believe Apple would want to appear to be bullying (as some people feel)
a small company, to possibly achieve intimidation through such fakery.

The John Does is a fleet rouse which they don't have to pursue if they choose not to.

In all seriousness, I do not believe a woes of why I wrote. I was just having a bit of fun.

PS: I don't recall Ouragon posting such outrageous things.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #32 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by UTisNUM1 View Post

I can't see how Psystar has made it this far.

I can...the justice system in the US is broken and corrupt. Judges can get paid off and people can sue anyone for any reason.
post #33 of 45
This whole case is nuts!

I can't see who Psystar with straight face can be doing this!

If Apple loses, can they appeal to the Supreme Court?

Apple MUST figure out who is funding Psystar! Where are the Private Investigators, reports etc. to uncover that Conspiracy?!

Also, who in their right mind would buy a clone to save a few $$, when for a few $$ more they'll have the REAL Deal, Support etc.?

Could Apple be ordered to provide Apple Care to Psystar machines, or at least Mac OS?

Also, Psystar should be ordered NOW to:

stop selling till this is resolved!

Put $$$ in Court's Custody equal to the amount of $$ they'd be ordered to pay Apple in event Apple wins! If they don't have that $$, they won't have it later, and thus they have nothing to lose! Thus anyone can sue anyone without a fear of paying up, if they lose?! Sounds like a predatory litigation!

This whole case is nuts!

Also, it's a huge TURN OFF to see people fighting with their posts!

Go  Apple!!!

Reply

Go  Apple!!!

Reply
post #34 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by macologist View Post

This whole case is nuts!

I can't see who Psystar with straight face can be doing this!

If Apple loses, can they appeal to the Supreme Court?

Apple MUST figure out who is funding Psystar! Where are the Private Investigators, reports etc. to uncover that Conspiracy?!

Also, who in their right mind would buy a clone to save a few $$, when for a few $$ more they'll have the REAL Deal, Support etc.?

Could Apple be ordered to provide Apple Care to Psystar machines, or at least Mac OS?

Also, Psystar should be ordered NOW to:

stop selling till this is resolved!

Put $$$ in Court's Custody equal to the amount of $$ they'd be ordered to pay Apple in event Apple wins! If they don't have that $$, they won't have it later, and thus they have nothing to lose! Thus anyone can sue anyone without a fear of paying up, if they lose?! Sounds like a predatory litigation!

This whole case is nuts!

Also, it's a huge TURN OFF to see people fighting with their posts!

apple has to do is offer a real desktop mid tower at $700 $1400 and kill off psystar.

But they are going the way if you can't compete litigate.
post #35 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon View Post

apple has to do is offer a real desktop mid tower at $700 $1400 and kill off psystar.

Exactly! If Apple was smart they would have kept up on the Mac Mini and wouldn't have opened the door to PsyStar in the first place.

To macologist:

Quote:
who in their right mind would buy a clone to save a few $$, when for a few $$ more they'll have the REAL Deal, Support etc.

A few $$??? Lets see a 2.8GHZ Quad-Core Intel processor with 8 GB of RAM and a 1TB HD and a video card with 512 MB of RAM costs:

From PsyStar, $1,798.99
From Apple, $4,299.00

So if $2500 dollars is only a few buck to you feel free to send some of that action my way and I'll be happy to pick up a real deal Mac.

To be fair a lot of that cost difference was in Apple's insane RAM markup. Going down to the Apple minimum of 2 GB of RAM for both boxes still leaves a $1000.00 difference in price between the two in PsyStar's favor.

Apple left a big hole in their lineup by letting the Mini get so outdated, they've ceded the low-cost market to the pirates.

I don't need support, I don't care what the box looks like, just give me good performance for a reasonable price and I'll pay some extra for the awesome operating system. Leaving a $1000.00 chasm between you and potential customers just doesn't make a lot of business sense.
post #36 of 45
Even if Psystar somehow wins this, it doesn't mean that Apple has to officially support other hardware. It would be up to the OEM's to make the hardware drivers and of course, pay Apple royalties. Psystar would even have to pay royalties to Apple for every Mac they sell. People who buy Apple Computers, would get Apple Care for their Apple computer. If they purchase it from Dell, HP or Psystar, Apple could make it so that they are responsible for Customer Service.
post #37 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongo View Post

Apple left a big hole in their lineup by letting the Mini get so outdated, they've ceded the low-cost market to the pirates.

1) The machines you compared are not even close to identical specs. But I understand that a Mac Pro is much machine for you, a Mac Mini is too little and you just don't want the AIO of an iMac, but that is what Apple wants to sell.

2) Even if the Mac Mini was updated weekly there would still be "a big hole" as the Mini uses notebook-grade components so the power to cost ratio is going to be higher. This hole is for a machine that is headless that uses desktop-grade parts that is smaller than the Mac Pro and single-socket. Perhaps Apple will feel they'll need to enter this market eventually as a more diverse product line is a logistic necessity as their unit sales increase, but it won't be as cheap as Psystar is selling since Apple will offer services that Psystar and other basement builders can't match. Plus, Apple wont put it in a cheap box with a cheap MoBo with cheap connectors, etc. They will eschew environmentally unfriendly components that Psystar would have no problem using. You mayno tlike it, but that is how it has always been and it doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #38 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongo View Post

Exactly! If Apple was smart they would have kept up on the Mac Mini and wouldn't have opened the door to PsyStar in the first place.

To macologist:



A few $$??? Lets see a 2.8GHZ Quad-Core Intel processor with 8 GB of RAM and a 1TB HD and a video card with 512 MB of RAM costs:

From PsyStar, $1,798.99
From Apple, $4,299.00

So if $2500 dollars is only a few buck to you feel free to send some of that action my way and I'll be happy to pick up a real deal Mac.

To be fair a lot of that cost difference was in Apple's insane RAM markup. Going down to the Apple minimum of 2 GB of RAM for both boxes still leaves a $1000.00 difference in price between the two in PsyStar's favor.

Apple left a big hole in their lineup by letting the Mini get so outdated, they've ceded the low-cost market to the pirates.

I don't need support, I don't care what the box looks like, just give me good performance for a reasonable price and I'll pay some extra for the awesome operating system. Leaving a $1000.00 chasm between you and potential customers just doesn't make a lot of business sense.

How dense are you? Not one of those machines is even designed with the Mac Pro specs in mind.

The LGA771 Socket boards aren't an option. The Quad Xeon isn't an option. Without that you aren't even discussing a Mac Pro. The ECC RAM is not an option.

No one in their right mind buys upgrades to RAM from Apple, so throwing that in is moronic.

Core i7 Extreme is the closest to the Xeon and with the addition of the bluetooth, 802.11n, and the mac/mouse premium you're over $3k.

If I bump up the Mac Pro with the 750GB drive they are within $79 of one another. Never mind the fact the > $400 case, 1500 W power supply and custom cabling and more that makes the Mac Pro the leader in case design, no one in their right mind would buy a 750GB drive for $150 when I can put in the equivalent 1TB for ~$100 from Newegg and install it myself.

I'm also not buying RAM from Apple. I'll order it and fill it up at a fraction of the cost, but then anyone who buys clones knows this crap and doesn't bulk up on RAM from even Psystar--who won't give you as solid a deal as Newegg.

Those cases from Psystar are cheap.
post #39 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) The machines you compared are not even close to identical specs. But I understand that a Mac Pro is much machine for you, a Mac Mini is too little and you just don't want the AIO of an iMac, but that is what Apple wants to sell.

2) Even if the Mac Mini was updated weekly there would still be "a big hole" as the Mini uses notebook-grade components so the power to cost ratio is going to be higher. This hole is for a machine that is headless that uses desktop-grade parts that is smaller than the Mac Pro and single-socket. Perhaps Apple will feel they'll need to enter this market eventually as a more diverse product line is a logistic necessity as their unit sales increase, but it won't be as cheap as Psystar is selling since Apple will offer services that Psystar and other basement builders can't match. Plus, Apple wont put it in a cheap box with a cheap MoBo with cheap connectors, etc. They will eschew environmentally unfriendly components that Psystar would have no problem using. You mayno tlike it, but that is how it has always been and it doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon.

why not a least have 128 vram (non from system) in the mac mini ATI can do it why not apple / nvidia?
post #40 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

How dense are you? Not one of those machines is even designed with the Mac Pro specs in mind.

You are looking at things backwards. Forget comparing spec to spec, look at the real world. How long does it take to get my work done?

For around half the price, you can get similar performance to a Mac Pro, with the same amount of ram and storage. The difference in actual operation would be negligible.

And don't talk about quality or design, I fix Macs and PCs all day long. Macs break just as often as other brands. Check out the line at the Genius Bar or a good pro Mac repair house sometime.

The OS is great and the hardware is pretty, but the main reason Apple charges more for their products is because they can. Good for them, but if I can outfit 2 stations for the price of 1 Mac, I would be crazy not to give it a good hard look.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Psystar seek protective order in preparation for trial